Gaia: The Integral Pod - Water Cooler - Is I-I a Cult?

Is I-I a Cult?

Sat, 12 May 2007 01:02:03 -0000

here's a good run down by eBuddha over at his Integral Practice blog. i think he's right.

~C

Re: Is I-I a Cult?

Sat, 12 May 2007 05:38:52 -0000

C4,

Me too. eBuddha handled the well designed question set fair and square. I wonder what the threshhold for cult status is? More than half yesses? Some of ?'s seemed more loaded than others - more telling of the creep factor, I mean. I'm not so sure I agree with lumping all guru yoga (if that was implied) into the same box as AC. I know squat about Cohen really except that I thought I smelled a rat many years ago when WIE started making funny noises about the New American Spirituality. Since then, he has been off my radar until early this winter when Lord Balder's, um, inquisition began. Taking the counsel of BlueGreen Tara, I choose to lay my stress upon the field where communion is and not where it is not (or something like that). My personal experience is with a guru yoga that nurtured me like a leg-broke lamb brought in from the field. I was welcomed, allowed to set my own dharma, contribute financially when and how I saw fit, to build practice in a way that fit for me. Never once was I openly solicited for $, nor did I ever see or hear of anyone else being approached even subtly. The current guru inherited the "mantle" just before I came to the practice. Almost instantly, things changed from the good-old-days of free love and biscuits Rajneesh style, to an ass-kicking ascetic feminist (if you could call it that) mode. Old-timers who had and were continuing to pour big $ into the Yoga were asked to pack up and head back out into their lives. Very few people were allowed to stay longer than 2 months. "This is an Ashram, not a retirement home." She said, "You are here to scrub the weariness from your flesh and bones. Scrub hard, scrub often, don't complain. Take your freshness back to the world that needs it." They were resolutely open to accept any form of religious expression. You could be a baptist fire-breather in Klan drag and you'd get the same smile, the same soft voice, the same directions to the holiest of holies. Utterly inclusive, not promotional at all, the Royal Path, they called it. Mmmmmmm. . . . .

yer pal,
Michael

Re: Is I-I a Cult?

Sat, 12 May 2007 18:32:12 -0000

This is from Matthew Dallman, who replied at ebuddha's original article. I have also taked with about 10 other former I-I employees who see things more like Matthew. Just sour grapes? If you think the latter that's another sign that you're part of the cult. ;)

by md on Sat 12 May 2007 08:44 AM PDT

Actually, that sounds about wrong. Dudes, people who worked at I.I. and I.U. called it a cult. Not everyone, but way more than a few, and several who were longtime Wilber associates, who stay on anyway because there may be career opportunities. Did either of you work for I.I./I.U., Perez, Ebuddha? I got plenty of private email from I.I. insiders, thanking me for talking openly about the cultic, groupthink dysfunction of the organization. Look, no one says it is Hale-Bopp; there are innumerable ways of being a cult. This cult was crack for the spiritually inclined, postmodernism-infected creative class. I have no interest in revisiting for any length of time all that stuff, all the reasons that I.I./I.U. is/was a joke. But, christ, this lame checklist and your opinions from outside the stadium hardly qualify as informed perspective on the actual game.

Re: Is I-I a Cult?

Sat, 12 May 2007 18:45:45 -0000

well, i'm not sure if Matthew Dallman is talking about the same people whom i've also met while i was in Boulder volunteering for I-I. but based on my experience, i disagree with MD.

however, it might look different on the inside. MD was an insider. i'm talking as an outsider. and from my limited outsider's point of view, I-I is not a cult (as in religious cult). MD keeps mentioning groupthink like it's a bane. i say that groupthink is also useful if you are in a group and want to accomplish something. that's why the military is very effective. so i say that I-I doesn't have enough groupthink (or groupthinkers). otherwise, it would've already been more effective than the People's Temple :)

my two cents.

~C

Re: Is I-I a Cult?

Sat, 12 May 2007 21:59:08 -0000

My only qualification to comment on this thread is that I've taken one Integral WET experience weekend in Miami last October.

I'm not sure that there is anything wrong with I-I being a cult. There would be a problem if it's a bad cult. Didn't someone say that all truth is initially cultic :-)?

My main problem with I-I and the crowd that I met in Miami is that it isn't very academically inclined. Since I'm an academic, I find the lack of high-quality discussions regarding AQAL, 1st tier/2nd tier etc. very frustrating. I think Wilber gets away with too much junk because there are no academics interested in challenging him.

Still the workshops are a helluva lot of fun and a great way to meet like-minded (spiritually inclined) people. So, I'm not too bothered by the cult-like atmosphere surrounding I-I. I'll continue to enjoy the workshops, meet some great people and keep a safe distance.

Anand

Re: Is I-I a Cult?

Sun, 13 May 2007 03:53:52 -0000

Michael, That sounds great - nice to know that there are "guru-yogis" who can manage their communities in ways that support and empower AND challenge the members, without becoming cultic! Appreciate the sharing.

Re: Is I-I a Cult?

Mon, 14 May 2007 08:04:44 -0000

For me it's pretty much self-evident that I-I the "movement" (for lack of a better word) is not a cult, although I can see how I-I, the actual business/organization, can be viewed by some as being cultic. But I bet you could say the same sort of things for just about any organization that has a strong "corporate culture". I-I is just more vulnerable to this sort of attack because the organization has a spiritual purpose. But I mean, you could also say that Apple is a "cult" led by its guru Steve Jobs for example, and Apple would probably score even higher on eBuddha's checklist than I-I did. (BTW, the checklist seems focused on identifying "bad cults", rather than the more generic concept of cult.)

At the end of the day, though, it's a silly argument because no I-I "follower" is being asked to participate in group suicide or donate all their life savings to the veneration of Wilber the Messaiah. And, from my "outsider" point of view, anyone who sees Wilber as any sort of guru in that sense doesn't understand what Wilber is all about. Sure, he's a human being with his own flaws and maybe has a lot to learn about running a business, so I-I, too, has flaws, but to try and write the whole movement off as a cult is just nonsense as far as I'm concerned. Let's judge I-I based on the vision of the movement, not on the actions and opinions of a few individuals involved in it (either "insiders" or fans of Wilber's brand of integral thought).

And even if I-I were, for the sake of argument, a "cult", there are, as has already been said, good "cults" (in the broadest possible sense) and bad ones, so we need to be clear on how exactly we're using the term. Otherwise, just calling I-I a "cult" is meaningless. Just as calling Cohen and his followers a "cult" is meaningless without being clear on why, exactly, you think he is an example of a "bad cult" and without basing this assessment on prejudice, shadow, and hearsay taken out of context.

Cheers,
Grey